Cognitive outcome after ventral capsule/ventral striatum stimulation for treatment-resistant major depression

Background: We report the neuropsychological outcome of 25 patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (TRD) who participated in an Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved randomised double-blind trial comparing active to sham deep brain stimulation (DBS) in the anterior limb of the ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS). Methods: Participants were randomised to active (n=12) versus sham (n=13) DBS for 16 weeks. Data were analysed at the individual and group levels. Group differences were analysed using repeated measures ANOVAs. Relationships between depression severity and cognition were examined using partial correlations. The false discovery rate method controlled for multiple analyses. Results: No significant interactions comparing active versus sham stimulation over time were evident. Change in depression was unrelated to change in neuropsychological measures. Twenty patients declined by ≥1 SD on at least one measure (41.3% of declines occurred in active group participants; 63.0% in older participants regardless of stimulation status). Twenty-two patients exhibited improvements \u3e1 SD on neuropsychological measures (47.7% in the active group; 63.1% in younger participants). Conclusions: These data suggest that VC/VS DBS in patients with TRD does not significantly affect neuropsychological function. Age at surgery, regardless of stimulation status, may be related to cognitive outcome at the individual patient level

Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Deep Brain Stimulation Think Tank: Advances in Neurophysiology, Adaptive DBS, Virtual Reality, Neuroethics and Technology.

The Seventh Annual Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) Think Tank held on September 8th of 2019 addressed the most current: (1) use and utility of complex neurophysiological signals for development of adaptive neurostimulation to improve clinical outcomes; (2) Advancements in recent neuromodulation techniques to treat neuropsychiatric disorders; (3) New developments in optogenetics and DBS; (4) The use of augmented Virtual reality (VR) and neuromodulation; (5) commercially available technologies; and (6) ethical issues arising in and from research and use of DBS. These advances serve as both "markers of progress" and challenges and opportunities for ongoing address, engagement, and deliberation as we move to improve the functional capabilities and translational value of DBS. It is in this light that these proceedings are presented to inform the field and initiate ongoing discourse. As consistent with the intent, and spirit of this, and prior DBS Think Tanks, the overarching goal is to continue to develop multidisciplinary collaborations to rapidly advance the field and ultimately improve patient outcomes

Double blind randomized controlled trial of deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder: Clinical trial design

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), a leading cause of disability, affects ~1–2% of the population, and can be distressing and disabling. About 1/3 of individuals demonstrate poor responsiveness to conventional treatments. A small proportion of these individuals may be deep brain stimulation (DBS) candidates. Candidacy is assessed through a multidisciplinary process including assessment of illness severity, chronicity, and functional impact. Optimization failure, despite multiple treatments, is critical during screening. Few patients nationwide are eligible for OCD DBS and thus a multi-center approach was necessary to obtain adequate sample size. The study was conducted over a six-year period and was a NIH-funded, eight-center sham-controlled trial of DBS targeting the ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS) region. There were 269 individuals who initially contacted the sites, in order to achieve 27 participants enrolled. Study enrollment required extensive review for eligibility, which was overseen by an independent advisory board. Disabling OCD had to be persistent for ≥5 years despite exhaustive medication and behavioral treatment. The final cohort was derived from a detailed consent process that included consent monitoring. Mean illness duration was 27.2 years. OCD symptom subtypes and psychiatric comorbidities varied, but all had severe disability with impaired quality of life and functioning. Participants were randomized to receive sham or active DBS for three months. Following this period, all participants received active DBS. Treatment assignment was masked to participants and raters and assessments were blinded. The final sample was consistent in demographic characteristics and clinical features when compared to other contemporary published prospective studies of OCD DBS. We report the clinical trial design, methods, and general demographics of this OCD DBS sample